Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis

From: Performance of the quick Sequential (sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment score as a prognostic tool in infected patients outside the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author, year [reference] Design Country Total no. of patients Mean age, years Male sex (%) Location Overall mortality rate (%) qSOFA score recorded Measured mortality Participant selection Primary study aim
April et al., 2017 [18] Retrospective, single-center, cohort study USA 214 68 59 ED 18.2 Worst values during ED stay In-hospital mortality Suspected infection, admitted to ICU Comparison of prognostic accuracy of qSOFA and SIRS for predicting in-hospital mortality
Askim et al., 2017 [19] Prospective, single-center, observational study Norway 1535 62 53 ED 4.4 ED arrival 7- and 30-day mortality Suspected infection Clinical usefulness of qSOFA to predict severe sepsis and 7- and 30-day mortality
Chen et al., 2016 [20] Retrospective, single-center, observational study China 1631 73 59 ED 33 ED arrival 28-day mortality Community-acquired pneumonia Comparison of prognostic performance of qSOFA, CRB-65, and CRB
Churpek et al., 2017 [21] Retrospective, single-center, observational study USA 30,677 58 47 ED, ward 5.4 At time of initial suspicion of infection In-hospital mortality Suspected infection Comparison of qSOFA with other commonly used early warning scores for in-hospital mortality
Donnelly et al., 2017 [22] Retrospective, multicenter, cohort study USA 2593 67 40 NA 11.3 Worst values within 28 h of hospital admission 28-day and 1-year mortality Suspected infection Incidence and long-term outcomes of patients diagnosed with sepsis and septic shock
Dorsett et al., 2017 [23] Retrospective, single-center, observational study USA 152 NA NA ED NA Prehospital, upon ED arrival, and during ED stay NA Suspected infection Prehospital qSOFA score in early identification of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock
Finkelsztein et al., 2017 [24] Prospective, single-center, cohort study USA 151 64 55 ED, ward 19 Within 8 h before ICU admission In-hospital mortality Suspected infection, admitted to medical ICU Comparison of discriminatory capacity of qSOFA vs. SIRS criteria for predicting in-hospital mortality and ICU-free days
Forward et al., 2017 [25] Retrospective, single-center, observational study Australia 162 NA NA Non-ICU 15.5 Within 24 h of deterioration In-hospital mortality Suspected infection Comparison of prognostic performance of qSOFA, SIRS, and SK criteria
Freund et al., 2017 [26] Prospective, multicenter, cohort study Europe 879 67 53 ED 8.4 Worst values during ED stay In-hospital mortality Suspected infection Validation of qSOFA as mortality predictor comparing SIRS with SOFA
Giamarellos-Bourboulis et al., 2017 [27] Retrospective, multicenter, cohort study Greece 3436 NA NA ED, ward 25.2 Initial values measured during admission to ED In-hospital mortality Suspected or confirmed infection Sensitivity of qSOFA for early assessment of mortality and organ dysfunction
Henning et al., 2017 [28] Post hoc analysis USA 7637 58 50 ED 14.2 Worst values during ED stay In-hospital mortality Suspected infection Performance of qSOFA predicting in-hospital mortality
Huson et al., 2017 [29] Retrospective, single-center, observational study Gabon 329 34 38 Non-ICU 4.5 At time of initial suspicion of infection In-hospital mortality Suspected infection Predictive value of qSOFA score for mortality
Hwang et al., 2017 [30] Retrospective, single-center, cohort study South Korea 1395 65 56 ED 15 ED arrival and within 3, 6, and 24 h In-hospital and 28-day mortality Severe sepsis or septic shock Diagnostic performance of positive qSOFA score for predicting 28-day mortality among critically ill patients with sepsis
Kim et al., 2017 [31] Retrospective, single-center, observational study South Korea 615 54 33 Non-ICU 3.2 At time of initial suspicion of infection 28-day mortality Neutropenic fever Predictive performance of qSOFA as screening tool for sepsis, mortality, and ICU admission
Kolditz et al., 2017 [32] Retrospective, multicenter, observational study Germany 9327 64 56 Non-ICU 3.0 At time of initial suspicion of infection 30-day mortality Community-acquired pneumonia Comparison of qSOFA and CRB-65 for risk prediction
Mellhammar et al., 2017 [33] Retrospective population-based study Sweden 339 NA NA Non-ICU NA Within ± 12 h from initiation of antibiotic therapy NA Suspected infection Incidence of sepsis with organ dysfunction
Park et al., 2017 [34] Retrospective, single-center, observational study South Korea 1009 67 45 ED 15.8 ED arrival In-hospital mortality Suspected infection Comparison of performance of qSOFA and SIRS to predict development of organ failure
Peake et al., 2017 [35] Post hoc analysis Australia 1591 63 60 ED 18.7 Worst values during ED stay 90-day mortality Early septic shock Exploration of utility and potential effects of new Sepsis-3 definitions
Quinten et al., 2017 [36] Prospective, single-center, observational study The Netherlands 193 60 56 ED 4.1 Initial values measured during admission to ED In-hospital, 28-day, and 6-month mortality Suspected or confirmed infection Comparison of predictive performance of qSOFA, CIS, and PIRO score for ICU admission
Ranzani et al., 2017 [37] Retrospective, two-center, cohort study Spain 6874 66 62 ED 6.4 ED arrival In-hospital mortality Community-acquired pneumonia Comparison of predictive performance of SIRS, qSOFA, CRB, mSOFA, and CURB-65 for in-hospital mortality
Seymour et al., 2016 [6] Retrospective, multicenter, cohort study (in the UPMC validation cohort) USA 66,522 61 43 ED, ward 2.8 At time of initial suspicion of infection In-hospital mortality Suspected infection Comparison of performance of qSOFA, SIRS, SOFA, and MODS score to predict sepsis
Wang et al., 2016 [38] Retrospective, single-center, observational study China 477 73 62 ED 27.4 ED arrival 28-day mortality Suspected infection Performance of qSOFA for predicting mortality and ICU admission
Williams et al., 2017 [39] Retrospective, single-center, observational study Australia 8871 49 51 ED 8.7 Worst values during ED stay 30-day and 1-year mortality Suspected infection Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of SIRS and qSOFA for organ dysfunction and mortality
  1. Abbreviations: qSOFA Quick Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment, ED Emergency department, ICU Intensive care unit, SIRS Systemic inflammatory response syndrome, CRB Confusion, respiratory rate ≥ 30/minute, systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≤ 60 mmHg, CRB-65 Confusion, respiratory rate ≥ 30/minute, systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≤ 60 mmHg, age ≥ 65 years, CURB-65 Confusion, urea nitrogen, respiratory rate ≥ 30/minute, systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≤ 60 mmHg, age ≥ 65 years, NA Not available, SK “Sepsis Kills” program clinical excellence committee, CIS Clinical Impression Score, PIRO Predisposition, infection, response, organ dysfunction, mSOFA Modified Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment, UPMC University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, MODS Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, SOFA Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment